OK, Stuff About Cables Yet Again - With Video.

[László]

It's 6:26 AM as I start this post. I had a little indigestion tonight and had a hard time sleeping. What do you do when you can't sleep? I dunno. I turned on the computer, poked around YouTube, and stumbled on a good video.

I've talked for years about the resonant peak and filtering inherent in various guitar components, including cables, and compared the effect to a low pass filter on a synthesizer with a resonance control creating a resonant peak.

A cable manufacturer asked Pete Thorn to do a cable comparison. He did one, and I'm about to link it.

I don't use the cables he compared (though I have tried Monster and Belden), I have no dog in this hunt.

Anyway, I watched the video, and Lo and behold, Pete explains, yes, resonant peaks and capacitance and filtering and all that, and he describes it better than me, and goes on to record some back to back to back comparisons with both clean and dirty tones.

Of course, everyone knows I'm full of crap and blah blah, and cables don't matter, but in point of fact they really do matter - everything matters.

Beyond that, they matter demonstrably.

For full disclosure, I use two kinds of guitar cable: Van Damme, the stuff PRS uses in their signature cables, and Sommer's lowest capacitance cable, which is a little stiffer than the Van Damme, but has a bit lower capacitance, so a tiny bit more high end comes through - but at the expense of flexibility. I'm happy with both brands, and use both for various purposes and reasons. I have never tried the Cordial cables he used in this comparison.

Enjoy the video, you'll learn stuff and might be surprised when you listen!

 

[László]

PS, I once posted a comparison of Sommer's very expensive low capacitance microphone cable with an industry standard cable on my old forum, with a Neumann mic and a 1073 preamp. Everyone who commented said they heard the difference. Those cables are all I use with a good condenser mic, like a Neumann.

So it's not just guitar cables. Don't even get me started on power cords. I thought the stuff about power cords was nonsense, until I tried the Music Cords. Now that's all I use, too.

You just never know with this stuff.

 

[Simon Says]

Be careful, Les. The topic of cables is a trap

I am still trying to decide which cable is best for a guitar, but I have a few thoughts.

Previously, I believed that the lowest capacity cable equals the best kind of cable. It's only partially true. Sure, you can't easily add the frequencies lost with higher capacity cable. I believe the loss of high-end is just a part of the topic. Now, I think there is a sweet spot for cable capacitance. To make it more complicated, the sweet spot is musician-dependent. If you look at the pros, like Santana, for example. He never goes wireless; he uses a 50ft Belden 1192a cable, with hardly low capacitance at 39.9pf/ft (Sommer LLX is 15pf/ft for comparison). Next, the Edge - he uses wireless, but just before the pedalboard, he has a simple decade capacitance box to add as much capacitance as he needs (guitar dependable). They use small (or moderate in the case of Santana) capacitance values to shift the resonant peak of their guitar pickups.

Some Silver Skyes are another example where small value capacitors are used to shift the resonant peak of pickups. You may see some guts where there is a small ceramic pickup between the hot and the ground of each of the SCs.

I used to go nuts with the cables; yet I only spend a little money on expensive stuff. The most expensive cable I use is the Evidence Siren II for my speaker cabinets. I'm using Daddario American Stage for everything else. I'm considering playing with the first cable from the guitar to the pedalboard; in my case, it would be the only cable that matters. I always have always-on pedals on my pedalboard, and the "problem" of capacitance does not exist once the signal riches that point, so the capacitance or length of the cable after the pedalboard doesn't matter as long as it's flexible, reliable and noisy free; which American Stage series are.

The main reason I decided to stick to what I have now as the first cable is the risk my tone or the way my rig reacts to my playing will be disturbed. The first question is: do I need low-loss cable where the tone stack on my amp on the OD channel has the treble zeroed out?

 

[jak3af3r]

Previously, I believed that the lowest capacity cable equals the best kind of cable. It's only partially true.

Yeah that's marketing for you.

I have a few thoughts about this topic similar to yours. Guitar and/or pickup manufacturers often make the claim they've spent significant time and effort optimizing the frequency content and response of the instrument. The cable maker makes the same claim as does the pedal maker, the amplifier maker, the cabinet maker, and the speaker maker.

Do all of these "optimizations" go after the same goal?

There is an audible difference in the video and it's most obvious when the signal is direct which is another interesting consideration...

The direct signal doesn't go through an amps EQ filtering or the speakers filtering which is usually limited in high and low frequency reproduction in guitar-specific applications. So how applicable is it to real-world scenarios? And by the time the instrument is mixed with others, how much masking negates the "benefit" of the less-lossy cable?

Now on the other hand, I know it's possible to select cables in specific places in the signal chain to sculpt the resulting tone. A good example of this is using different cables in a passive FX loop to tame or accentuate "harshness."

Another thing to think about is if you have overdrive or distortion built into the amp and it has EQ, is the EQ pre or post OD. If you have pre OD EQ, what are the pot values? What are the pot tapers? What is the EQ for each band set to cut? Are you already sending the extra highs you would normally get to ground with a bright switch deactivated?

Let's say it's post OD EQ. Now does the less lossy cable upset the OD character with too much high-end? Or make it too buzzy because the bass signal is raised enough to start clipping earlier?


The list goes on and on.

 

[Tony M.]

It's all very simple.

The easier time those electrons have getting to where they are going,
the harder they will work when they get there.

 

[Simon Says]

Yeah that's marketing for you.

I have a few thoughts about this topic similar to yours. Guitar and/or pickup manufacturers often make the claim they've spent significant time and effort optimizing the frequency content and response of the instrument. The cable maker makes the same claim as does the pedal maker, the amplifier maker, the cabinet maker, and the speaker maker.

Do all of these "optimizations" go after the same goal?

There is an audible difference in the video and it's most obvious when the signal is direct which is another interesting consideration...

The direct signal doesn't go through an amps EQ filtering or the speakers filtering which is usually limited in high and low frequency reproduction in guitar-specific applications. So how applicable is it to real-world scenarios? And by the time the instrument is mixed with others, how much masking negates the "benefit" of the less-lossy cable?

Now on the other hand, I know it's possible to select cables in specific places in the signal chain to sculpt the resulting tone. A good example of this is using different cables in a passive FX loop to tame or accentuate "harshness."

Another thing to think about is if you have overdrive or distortion built into the amp and it has EQ, is the EQ pre or post OD. If you have pre OD EQ, what are the pot values? What are the pot tapers? What is the EQ for each band set to cut? Are you already sending the extra highs you would normally get to ground with a bright switch deactivated?

Let's say it's post OD EQ. Now does the less lossy cable upset the OD character with too much high-end? Or make it too buzzy because the bass signal is raised enough to start clipping earlier?


The list goes on and on.

Preceding amp stages still buffer the passive FX loop. The cable capacitance would not matter a lot, but I agree with everything else.

 

[László]

The reason I posted this video was merely to demonstrate that cables matter, and because Thorn gets into the weeds (pun intended) with some very good explanations of what's going on when you plug a cable into a guitar.

Questions of how cables are marketed, of what types cables people prefer, etc., are actually tangential to the discussion.

Do cables matter? Certainly, and obviously. Yet lots of players deny it. All we have to do is listen to see it's real, and it's also good to know why.

If you look at the pros, like Santana, for example. He never goes wireless; he uses a 50ft Belden 1192a cable, with hardly low capacitance at 39.9pf/ft (Sommer LLX is 15pf/ft for comparison). Next, the Edge - he uses wireless, but just before the pedalboard, he has a simple decade capacitance box to add as much capacitance as he needs (guitar dependable). They use small (or moderate in the case of Santana) capacitance values to shift the resonant peak of their guitar pickups.

Yup, I'm well aware of the choices and considerations in the cable world, but I can only speak for myself. I've experimented extensively with this, including higher and lower capacitance cables.

As you know, the Sommer Spirit LLX with its extremely low capacitance - lowest made, actually - and Van Damme at 25 or so pF per foot - work best for me, the tone I want, and the gear I use. But: Horses for courses. I use something else for bass very often.

I realize that Santana likes his high end rolled off. That's what the Sweet Switch on my CU24 PS does, and apparently PRS started using it because Santana wanted something that simulated his 50 feet or so of cable. I never use the damn Sweet Switch. But I figure if, one day, I encounter an amp that's way too bright, or record in a room that's too ringy, the Sweet Switch will finally serve its purpose on my guitar!

I work hard to get my high frequencies the way I want. If I want less HF content, I have tone controls. In any event, I'm careful choosing cables, and have been experimenting for a LOT of years. So I have a pretty good idea what my preferences are.

Do all of these "optimizations" go after the same goal?

Does it matter what their goal is, as long as you can hear the difference between various options and get what you, personally, want?

There is an audible difference in the video and it's most obvious when the signal is direct which is another interesting consideration...

I thought the audible difference was plain as day through both the amps, and going direct.

But yes, a clean guitar amp generates about 10% harmonic distortion. Audio direct boxes generate less than one percent.

The harmonic distortion, and its character, shape the tone of what comes out of the amp. It can add harmonics. It can reduce harmonics. Naturally it's going to have the character of the amp.

 

[Greywolf]

well I vouch for the difference . when artist come up with cheap ones , I switch them out . I use either Monster or Mogami , I've tried many others .
The XLR's I 've been using (Roland) are much better shielded than the cheapy ones the Cafe' had , and on Mic's in is really pronounced.
People think " Oh this is the hot mic " No ..it's the one with the good cable ...
With Acoustic instruments a little noise is a LOT more evident than a guy with a pedal board of doom and a Stack .

 

[László]

well I vouch for the difference . when artist come up with cheap ones , I switch them out . I use either Monster or Mogami , I've tried many others .
The XLR's I 've been using (Roland) are much better shielded than the cheapy ones the Cafe' had , and on Mic's in is really pronounced.
People think " Oh this is the hot mic " No ..it's the one with the good cable ...
With Acoustic instruments a little noise is a LOT more evident than a guy with a pedal board of doom and a Stack .

This is a great example of why we in audio land have our own preferences and follow them (I include Greywolf in this description since he clearly knows his stuff, and knows what he likes).

I use Mogami as +4 pro-level line cable in the studio, and sometimes as mic cable. I have Mogami cables that are over 30 years old that were built by my former tech (who unfortunately passed away about ten years ago). They work perfectly.

Longevity is a good thing!

I had the opportunity to test Sommer's recently-introduced EMC-Quad Core Reference 4 Mic & AES/EBU cable with custom NEUTRIK EMC connectors that have "fingers" around the inside edges to make greater contact and reduce noise. This cable runs about $210 for an 18 foot length.

That's expensive, but I really liked what I heard, and immediately bought 3 of them. As long as my cables have lasted, I get my money's worth using them on projects.

With guitar, however, I will only use Mogami AFTER a buffer, because the capacitance is about 46 pF per foot, and it attenuates the high frequencies more than I like. It's great post-buffer, once the guitar hits the pedalboard.

I don't like Monster cable for guitar, I find it attenuates the high frequencies, just as we heard in the Thorn video. However, I have some gigantically thick Monster mic cables that I often use between a direct box I use for bass, and my interface. Their high frequency roll-off is sometimes exactly what I want for bass.

So yes...horses for courses!

 

[László]

I should mention that I have a box of expensive cables that I absolutely never use. They're very high quality. They simply don't do what I want to do. Some roll off the high frequencies, others do other things to the audio I don't personally care for.

If anyone's in the Detroit area and wants to take them off my hands for free, let me know. Stop by and pick 'em up, or we can arrange for you to send a prepaid UPS label, WITH a pickup so I don't have to schlep to the UPS store to drop off a box of cables I'm giving away!

 

[Bogner]

I Am Not A Cable Denier...I Am A Cable Truther.

I Have Always Been One To Say That Everything In The Chain Matters And Effects The Overall Sound. Even If The Effect Is Minimal It Triggers Response In The Entire Chain Which Can Lead To Significant Outcomes. Cables Can Be Very Impacting In My Experiences.

 

[RossF]

It's 6:26 AM as I start this post. I had a little indigestion tonight and had a hard time sleeping. What do you do when you can't sleep? I dunno. I turned on the computer, poked around YouTube, and stumbled on a good video.

I've talked for years about the resonant peak and filtering inherent in various guitar components, including cables, and compared the effect to a low pass filter on a synthesizer with a resonance control creating a resonant peak.

A cable manufacturer asked Pete Thorn to do a cable comparison. He did one, and I'm about to link it.

I don't use the cables he compared (though I have tried Monster and Belden), I have no dog in this hunt.

Anyway, I watched the video, and Lo and behold, Pete explains, yes, resonant peaks and capacitance and filtering and all that, and he describes it better than me, and goes on to record some back to back to back comparisons with both clean and dirty tones.

Of course, everyone knows I'm full of crap and blah blah, and cables don't matter, but in point of fact they really do matter - everything matters.

Beyond that, they matter demonstrably.

For full disclosure, I use two kinds of guitar cable: Van Damme, the stuff PRS uses in their signature cables, and Sommer's lowest capacitance cable, which is a little stiffer than the Van Damme, but has a bit lower capacitance, so a tiny bit more high end comes through - but at the expense of flexibility. I'm happy with both brands, and use both for various purposes and reasons. I have never tried the Cordial cables he used in this comparison.

Enjoy the video, you'll learn stuff and might be surprised when you listen!

Good post. Thx.

I learned cables were important to sound from an interview with Townsend, who mentioned the gifts he got from Joe Walsh and Walsh telling Pete the cable was very important to the overall sound. I can't find the interview, but I found an article that mentions the gear Walsh donated including the type of cable.

https://www.thewho.net/whotabs/gear/guitar/gretsch.html

 

[Greywolf]

I've heard better than the Monster , for gig use I I like them because the hold up well and good bang for $ .
When the time comes, as it always does to get a new guitar cable I want to try the Van Damme/ PRS .

I 've been using an Xotic Super Sweet to buffer on the front end to clean things up (last in chain) , rarely more than 3db of boost and only the mids. I love what it does.

If you are recording , do yourself a BIG favor and invest in good equipment , in the end it saves a lot of headaches and time .

and always Trust Your Ears

 

[Birdsofprey]

This is a great thread my only caution is if you can’t hear the science then all the tone, mods, woods, picks, pickups, amp modelers, set-ups, country of origin etc etc only becomes points to banter about but none the same i get the passion of our craft.

 

[dmatthews]

Wireless at practice and gigs. Cables otherwise.

 

[veinbuster]

I didn’t watch the video, because I don’t want to obsess about it. I just like playing my guitar.

But, I have tried a bunch of cables over the years and have mostly been a sceptic about the impact. Still, I have one I prefer for acoustic on-board electronics, and one I prefer for solid body guitars. I have two of each and will probably never buy another cable.

 

[László]

I didn’t watch the video, because I don’t want to obsess about it. I just like playing my guitar.

If you're a cable skeptic, watching the video is all the proof of concept you'll need. Anyone can hear the differences; every one of those cables sounds different.

That was my sole point in posting the video.

 

[Prs Mods too]

I've been using some cheap cable that's probably 25 years old. I have no idea what brand it is so I hope it never shorts anywhere but at the ends because I can easily repair it there and I love how it sounds.